Facebook Spying on Text Messages

Reading this article has changed my thoughts about how major internet companies are collecting personal data without the knowledge of the clients. Although it may say exactly what they are doing in their privacy policy, the amount of people who are willing to read through the entire document, or the people who are willing to boycott the service because of these breaches of privacy are few, thus there are still millions of people being spied on.

Facebook has over half a billion users, and even though they can monitor all of the activity that occurs over their servers, they still admit to tracking text messages of the client's that have downloaded their Facebook application. What really surprised me is the fact the YouTube can remotely access user's smartphone cameras taking pictures or videos at any time.

With the popularity of these two companies it seems like they are pushing the limits of the data that they really need in order to maintain a popular and enjoyable experience using their product. Logically I cannot see a reason that a video hosting website would need to take arbitrary images and videos. Posting a video on YouTube and having a video randomly snapped without your knowledge are two totally different things.

I feel that these companies really need to make it clear to users what they are doing and what the purpose of it is. By make it clear, I mean explaining this outside of their privacy policy where in the article it claims 70% of users do not read, which means 70% of users do not know about these invasions.

Monitoring data with a 70% secrecy rate seems outrageous, and in my opinion this quickly needs to change. Privacy isn't a luxury, it is a right, and these companies need to understand this.


Article link again:

http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/facebook-spies-on-phone-users-text-messages-report-says/story-e6frfku0-1226282017490

Catholic Schools in Toronto Look to Ban WiFi in Classrooms

A group of teachers that are members of  The Ontario English Catholic Teachers Association are looking to ban WiFi in schools because of the potential health risks. The author of the article that I read about has a very strong opinion about this debate, which I agree with. In the article it states that "Radiation exposure from WiFi is about 100,000 times less than waves emitted from a microwave". He makes the argument that if we remove wireless routers, why not remove the microwaves as well since they also pose a risk. I agree fully because it is contradictory to allow the removal of a very useful and efficient technology, wireless internet, while on the other hand allow the convenience of a microwave oven while both present the same health concern. 

Wireless internet is wildly used around the world and some cities are even implementing municipal wireless networks, which turns the whole city into a large wireless access zone. Clearly if WiFi posed such danger, this would not even be considered in such a large scale as an entire city. Wireless internet, in my opinion, is a great asset as it allows students to access information, or allows teachers to present information in a variety of ways. 

As a personal example, when I was in grade 7, all we did during every history class was copy page after page on an overhead slide and none of it was ever really presented or explained. We did have internet, but wireless internet wasn't implemented into school. If we had some multimedia presentation I think my view of history class would be quite different, since all I really didn't benefit from being in that class. 

Conclusively, wireless internet in elementary schools seems more beneficial to education than detrimental to health, and I agree with the author that there should be no problem in having it in the schools.

Article: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health/new-health/andre-picard/a-catholic-teachers-association-

looks-to-ban-wifi-whats-next-coffee/article2343964/

Googlighting by Microsoft

On Monday, Microsoft released a comical video on YouTube (ironic) about Google killing off many of their applications, thus being an unstable company. Although the video did not get much respect from YouTube viewers, comments such as:

" ... This is aimed at Corporations. not 12 year old hipsters. Oh and +1 to Microsoft, for making Google host this video." 
(Note that this was the top rated comment when I saw the video, also I edited the comment due to profanity.)

explain in brief what Microsoft was really aiming at. Being two of the largest tech companies around, it is funny that Microsoft would use a method that is, in my opinion, quite humble. There are definitely much better methods of competing than attacking your opponent in a video, but I feel they aimed for the irony rather than the punch. Posting the video on YouTube which is run by Google salts the wounds, and gives the video that extra bit of funny.

To address Google being unstable, I feel that they are definitely a very strong company and that this video will not ruin their reputation in the slightest. Sure they did can a bunch of applications, and sure they probably should have planned better, but killing off a bunch of failing apps early is better than beating a dead horse, in my opinion.

I can see a revenge video on the horizon, possibly attacking Windows, or Internet Explorer. Creating a hype between Google and Microsoft would be fun to watch, and would definitely be better than hearing about some lame Hollywood drama for a change.

Video link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=k4EbCkotKPU

Also, I came across a funny, irrelevant image that I would like to share.

Google Using Bypass to Monitor Users Online

After reading this article, I was quite surprised that such a large company that Google is would be applying methods of privacy invasion on iPhones and Mac computers. I was surprised because Google seems to portray that they are keen on privacy protection, especially after recently releasing a new privacy policy. The point of a privacy policy is to explicitly state how your privacy can be invaded while using the product, and going against it is not only immoral but detriments a reputation. Google has broken Apple's privacy policy by bypassing a certain flaw in the Safari browser that allows them to monitor a user online.

Google has plenty of products and they are certainly gaining information according to their own policy, which is why I decided to investigate further on exactly what information they are collecting and what they are doing with it. I decided I would start with Google's new privacy policy. After seeing some of the licences in lecture that were using words and other terms that were over my head, I have to say that the policy is an easy read and gets to the point quickly. There is no redundancy and explicitly states what information they collect and what they use it for. I also appreciate that they are blatantly telling us how our privacy is being interfered without any confusion and that there is also a FAQs section of the policy which answers very useful questions.

Although the policy is clear, I now know that Google is collecting a lot more information than I assumed. Their tools are very useful, but it seems like it is impossible to use anything Google related without having at least some of your data collected by them. In my opinion this is how the Internet will continue to evolve, where privacy protection isn't an issue, and we will continue to be monitored as log as we are online.

Pirate Bay - Changes Domain

After reading an article at (this link) it is becoming more obvious that the government is content with being more involved when it comes to Internet censorship and putting an end to online piracy.

SOPA, PIPA, and other new censorship and piracy prevention laws are on the rise, trying to banish piracy on the Internet. The Pirate Bay is one of the largest torrenting websites around, and given that the US just took down one of their competitors MegaUpload, they have moved their domain out of the US and made it local to Sweden, changing it from .org to .se. The reason for this change was to prevent the US government from seizing the domain. The FBI spent over a year investigating MegaUpload's violation of copyright law in the US, and the Pirate Bay will likely be targeted next.

Reading through the Pirate Bay's blog, they have been threatened by many well known companies, threatening to sue if their protected work is not removed from the site. What they are doing is actually not against Swedish law, and they have never removed any torrents. Not complying with large companies in the US seems risky and it's no surprise that the Pirate Bay is a target.

My opinion on this is that although there are many works that are created in the US being pirated, I think it is Sweden's responsibility to handle the removal of the content and that the US should have no ability to manipulate another country's laws. Even with the permission of the country's government, I still feel they should have no power outside the US. The reason I feel this way is that it prevents corrupt and powerful governments from investigating or arresting non-citizens.

Government involvement in terms of copy right laws on the Internet needs to be created by people who actually understand how the Internet works as a society and not based on maximizing profits. Society on the Internet isn't the same as it is in real life, and the laws need to reflect that.